Effect on SACC: This would remove the genera Tityra,
Schiffornis, Laniocera, Iodopleura, Laniisoma, Xenopsaris, and Pachyramphus from
the Cotingidae.

Background: The above genera have been shuffled
between Tyrannidae and Cotingidae for much of this century. See Prum &
Lanyon (1989) and Prum (1990) for a review. Prum & Lanyon's (1989)
and Prum's (1990) analyses of morphological data were sufficient to
convince some (e.g. AOU 1998) to place them as Incertae Sedis until their
relationships were resolved. Then, Prum et al.'s (2000) analysis of mtDNA
sequence data placed them within a broadly defined Cotingidae, and that's why
and where they reside in our current sequence.

New data: Johansson et al.'s (2002) analysis of
mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences (but with perhaps the all-time extreme
in limited taxon-sampling) found little or no support for a sister relationship
between the Schiffornis group (represented by Schiffornis, Pachyramphus,
and Tityra) and core cotingas (represented by Pyroderus).

Chesser (2004) used DNA sequence data (mt and nuclear) from a broader range of taxa and found
that the Schiffornis group (represented by the same 3 genera above plus Laniocera and
Iodopleura) was not the sister group to core cotingas (represented by Rupicola and Procnias)
nor to the Tyrannidae (the traditional alternative), but rather to the Pipridae
(bootstrap support 84% with maximum likelihood).

In both cases, support was strong for monophyly
(albeit with limited taxon-sampling) of the Schiffornis group.

Analysis: The basis for inclusion of the Schiffornis
bunch in the Cotingidae is Prum et al. (2000). I think that Rick would be the
first to point out that Prum et al.'s (2000) analysis would not be publishable
now because only 375 bp of sequence were analyzed (vs. 1000++ for such analyses
"nowadays"). Furthermore, they analyzed only cytochrome b, whose
utility at higher-level systematics may be limited, and did not report
bootstrap values. Although they concluded that the Schiffornis group should be
included as a subfamily of the Cotingidae, the node supporting this (vs.
relationship to Pipridae or Piprites) has essentially no support in
their analysis, and no Tyrannidae were included in the analysis.

Given the two more recent studies above and
given that Rick's previous morphological studies did not find strong support
for inclusion of these genera in the Cotingidae, my conclusion is that we
essentially have no data to support the current classification and plenty of
contrary data.

Recommendation: I vote YES on this because the
combination of recent genetic and morphological evidence reduces our evidence
for their inclusion in Cotingidae to near zero.

If the proposal passes, then we have to decide
WHERE to place these genera. I'll do a separate proposal for that. The only two
options that I see are to place them in our suboscine Incertae Sedis (as in AOU
1998 and currently occupied only by Piprites in SACC) or to create a
family-level taxon for them (Tityridae).

Comments from Stiles: "YES. I agree
that the best current evidence indicates that these birds are neither cotingids
nor tyrannids. I would not be unhappy with Tityridae (presumably Piprites would
also fall here? In its singing behavior it reminds me somewhat of Laniocera)."

Comments from Silva: "Yes. I think
that a family-level new group (Tityridae) should be the best option given the
uncertainties associated with this problem."

Comments from Zimmer: "I vote
"YES". No real evidence for maintaining these within Cotingidae. I
also think that given the evidence for monophyly within the Schiffornis group
(even if all genera weren't included in the analysis), the best thing to do is
to create a new family-level grouping (Tityridae), possibly to include Piprites."

Comments from Stotz: "YES. The basis
for placing the Schiffornis group within Cotingidae was always very weak, so
weak that the Northern AOU never followed Prum 2000 treatment. The
mitochondrial DNA sample was too limited, and it has become clear that
Cytochrome B is not very useful at this taxonomic level. My personal feeling is
that the current data really suggests that a new family, Tityridae, is the way
to go."